I need examples of existing rail lines sharing right-of-ways with public trails.

Thanks,

Ken

There is a walking path that runs right alongside the line of the Fox River Trolley Museum in South Elgin, IL. For parts of the line, the path is within ten feet of the ties.

Frank Hicks

Fox River Trolley Museum
fullparallel@wideopenwest.com

The York County rail trail, the trains do not operate on the rails presently they did run trains for many years with the trail right next to the tracks. This trail is matched end to end with the Northern Central trail (no rails on that portion) for a great 40 mile trail.

Also the Thun (pronounced Tune) trail near Reading, PA is right next to an active NS secondary route.

In both cases I think the lines were double track and now are single track with the extra space used for the trail.

Tom Gears

Northern Central and York County Rail Trails

The Northern Central Trail beside the rail does
occupy the missing track's bed, including over
bridges, and even through a tunnel!
The Western Maryland Trail will have the same
setting West of Cumberland, except there will be
2 double-track tunnels with one track gone.
(Farther West, the rails are all gone and the
tunnels were single track.)
Despite these examples, the conventional wisdom is
"It can't be done!" and "It never has been done!"

104577.651@compuserve.com

From today's Flimsies, article describing plans for restored rail line and adjacent bike and pedestiran pathway in Ukiah, California.

Cheers,
Keith Albrandt

Return to trains, a rail trail planned
kalbrandt@rypn.org

At Spooner shares ROW with a trail for some miles.


Wrinnbo@aol.com

There is a trail that shares the ROW with Metra's Mchenry branch. There is a fence that sepreates the two but this is a major RR operation sharing a ROW so it should be a great example if you are looking at using a template with a class 1 player.

Chris

ablemanscurve@hotmail.com

> There is a trail that shares the ROW with
> Metra's Mchenry branch. There is a fence
> that sepreates the two but this is a major
> RR operation sharing a ROW so it should be a
> great example if you are looking at using a
> template with a class 1 player.

> Chris

For that matter, there are a couple of public STREETS in Michigan City that share the South Shore's right-of-way. There's the ultimate example!

> I need examples of existing rail lines
> sharing right-of-ways with public trails.

> Thanks,

> Ken

"There are currently 62 rails with trails in the United States, with 150 more planned for the future" - do a google search on "Rails with trails" and start reading!!

California State Railroad Museum's Sacramento Southern shares much of its route atop a levee with a public trail

> I need examples of existing rail lines
> sharing right-of-ways with public trails.

> Thanks,

> Ken


benquirkc@yahoo.com

The Oregon Pacific RR, former Portland Traction Co ROW for 3+ miles is now a "rails and trails" line. The trail shares the ROW on what was once a double tracked line. The ROW is fenced, about 5' on straight, 7' tall on curves. Two path "underpasses" were constructed for trail users. The Grand Opening of the trail is June 28th-29th.

For more event info check out the ORHF site.

"orhf dot org"

> I need examples of existing rail lines
> sharing right-of-ways with public trails.

> Thanks,

> Ken

From a seminar at TRAIN at Spencer two years ago, an attorney related the incident where the Alaska RR share ROW with a trail on the south end, and despite fencing, the locals continued to cut short cuts through it. A youth lost some limbs in an altercation with a train, and while ARR ultimately won the case, it cost them (I recall) over $400,000 in legal fees to dispose.

I am somewhat familiar with the efforts to put in the trail adjacent to the WMSR in Cumberland, MD. The only fencing the trail advocates will pony up for is basic post and chain. No one has of yet come up with a common sense plan for coexistence of steam loco and hiker/bikers in Brush Tunnel. My personal concern is some biker freewheeling down the 1.5% at too high rate of speed, hitting a stray chunk of ballast, and skulling himself on the rail. The hiker/biker advocates will have no liability, but such a case could put a lessor tourist railway right out of business, just like that! (Not to mention the increased insurance rates that will happen even before the skulling when the insurance company finds out they are sharing ROW. Remember, the hiker/bikers will not have to have insurance to use the ROW, but the tourist railway will).

Steve

SZuidervee@aol.com

I'm wondering if whistle bans have relevance to this situation? As I understand it, a community may ban a railroad from blowing for crossings, but must assume liability for accidents that result. With this in mind, could agreements be inked that a tourist RR be held harmless for accidents that resulted from sharing a trail on its ROW? I think if this were the case, communities could have their bike path (if they still wanted it that bad) and the RR could still operate.

ryarger@rypn.org

> I'm wondering if whistle bans have relevance
> to this situation? As I understand it, a
> community may ban a railroad from blowing
> for crossings, but must assume liability for
> accidents that result. With this in mind,
> could agreements be inked that a tourist RR
> be held harmless for accidents that resulted
> from sharing a trail on its ROW? I think if
> this were the case, communities could have
> their bike path (if they still wanted it
> that bad) and the RR could still operate.

The good old "hold harmless clauses" don't work (maybe they never did ???) I would assume that RR entering into such an agreement would insist that the trail people cover all insurance and legal problems. Personally I don't want to be in the tunnel with the Western Maryland Steamer but then again I am a wimp. On the other hand maybe the trail folks can make an untenable insurance situation work (read throw $$$).

lamontdc@adelphia.net

> The good old "hold harmless
> clauses" don't work (maybe they never
> did ???) I would assume that RR entering
> into such an agreement would insist that the
> trail people cover all insurance and legal
> problems. Personally I don't want to be in
> the tunnel with the Western Maryland Steamer
> but then again I am a wimp.

*Been there on a Carl Franz charter......... your loss, my gain! hand maybe the trail folks can make an
> untenable insurance situation work (read
> throw $$$).

FOTFL............ Okay, if I have the numbers right, something like a couple dollars of every ticket on the Strasburg, EBT, WMSR, GCR, etc. is going to insurance--anywhere between 20 and 50+% of the price. With THAT in mind, can one calculate the cost PER PERSON of every user of these particular trails? You'd have to charge every user $5 or more per trip just to pedal on a couple miles of trail!

Hell, let's take this further: If we applied this same formula to "insurance" covering every user of, for example, the bike trails from Cumberland/Hancock, Md. to Pittsburgh on the old WM line, wouldn't it be cheaper to buy each individual a personal taxi ride from point to point? (Well, if Amtrak critics are going to apply that logic, I say the same logic applies here.......)

lner4472@bcpl.net